High Court Karnataka High Court

K S Srikantha vs United India Insurance Co Ltd on 12 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
K S Srikantha vs United India Insurance Co Ltd on 12 March, 2008
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
III

1:: 'IRE 1.31.... :.~.....Im' ,_ 1c_nmAfrA1<A AT Hummus

'-

3 *1"  my at-* 1~.«..-9-.1=:r.'.:1-xi 

THE HOWBLE ma. Jusncn  *    

  

Kssnnuumm,   «    _ 
am  Is: 3UB"nwuw""""ffi HH:--~m?.. %  
AGEE3ABC1lJT36YEAR8,"   j 
rayon m.225,3#==+A=::noag.,  % AA 
HATFEGUPPA    

gm  ,3

1.

UHHEi§”Hififi1
BY’i’I’.3″ %

* 4,DF«?I:9_IQ!l’£LL mmfaaisn.
.JEL1T1’i’i..E’§J’ERS. {

2. is % % .

–J ~n.’ni’I’I’l.I.I’«I’I’.fl_|’

‘ ___~1I£u\IInI.-ru’s’v’ R,
Iii?-fiD.MfiJOR. H ‘_
‘ -,RJ’_QF HCL11, 1073 MAIN.

35. P AGE.’-l’1.A.R!;=

9 M;g.a,mm; .. 23. …nns1=oirrEfir”ra

us! smaQ_1_.I_.I. mm. F012 an

Ti Igfigagalinruniln W11-A___Anrmnl in film] t’4Iflfl¢__1″._fiA(!Hn1″I

173:1: of M.V.Act agai?nfi:I’1;jT.%nt
fi.11.iGi”JE”r passed in EVE Iio.”..ifi63i”i”L1’L”1-‘i on the “fi’u_”s~
VII Add]. «Judge, Member, MACT-3, court of

Metropolimn Area, Banga1oto(SC-CH-3]. 4_

nlnin-I 119:1-Itlnn fin’ nnnmarsnnfinn Arid nnnleina in-nhnnnnrnfiaqnf
Iflljflfilé rU”‘UD’o|III’¢I-E 2”?’ ‘E’fwT K T K j T ~.

afoonnpunnatinn.

_ TOY

This Appeal coming on A’ ” 3

Court defiwx-eii the following»? –

“‘|.3a. nndngni in __ nmnn|4.’I’naI-I-
‘Ill-T I Iallfififlv. ‘Iv.-E _ I! W’

2. appearing on hahnlfof

_ the material on record.

” nmianm + __._._ nnm n 1g-_cg.g_x_1.-g 1_-__._.,.

—-.r 15-… . i——-u—is: -an. — –r-u—u——–v—— —— q –

‘~ .7appciiant untrained frantlma of right mnxfiia

1 Ami’ fm.-mm of right aygomauc home. The clI.nnan’ 1:

Einpauem in the noapmu for about 7 aaya. He was

ind mi implant: um used. The Tribunal in all has

an nf’ .1 ‘I if’! (1’I”\I.;

l:I.wu.I.u.-ulul. vuuu nun.-ull.-ml. U1 1\n-J..uv’:rvv,f .

A/5

gal

arm; _-l.’_..1__-Lu..- .__.._4..:_.. -1-..
5}’!!!

umuumly fvf fiifi pau.’I:|:1.uII.r W”I’fi(Tlfi fif

10% disability on the whole body. The 333% 4_

nppalru to he uxagsermnd.

fact that the claimant in an
‘mm. This court is of the ‘~g9p. he must
have uufierrad about was in than who]: body

that may atleaet to

ma Fin}-El2?’,EKJ(l,isVV of am of future I.’macru’1:’nI
of ., L V V

1:. He nmst haw spent more aha. This Court

A x lose sight. of the fact that the claimant is not
to mumta1n'” ° the znadioal hills 1nat:cubuu’ ly dung’

and Rs.5,0D0_I- bowarda oonvgyanoag

5. “rm Tribunal hm righuy T , _

na.ao.uoo:- towards has or up%%1W X4

7. A: than in zjehfinzg to loan of
future ‘ _-to has not awarded

twat v¢1aan§n.«;””‘:-an ‘”a.Afra.-a.a”v;.;g¢”.: gag di mu 1′

the witnfiiis iauciy. : mama’ um” i. i:’ms c’nuI::Ian’ i: has

sufi’emd_ _ on rnght’ arm. In thh

‘ me court awards Ro.50.000/~ under the
A

AA 3.-._ jAu the c1n.:n’.|nn’ 1: Ill! 1:: 1mdergoA phyu’ ufluru’ ‘ py in

: aVcoc-‘danca with the Doctor’: advlno he in enuuaa to

LA

an

the «claimant ia tsntitlecl to R&s.2,35,000.I’–
fiJIlowir1gc::rderiamad’ 3: L A

The cxaimanr — appenam i mm ‘

ooxngmnmtixznn of Ra.2,35,C3£}_(j}.g_uv'”I1in’I:1 is of
a…’-.;.-m2′-.1:. _1_m_J.eIfi_=,r The
oompenaatzion shaii ‘firm th-..;. date 91’
Few” fin \

shall be ciepoaiteti in any
Haflonfiiliafiofl. clmioe for a pen-ind of

– appellant is. at liberty ta

. 331-: .amr..1″..ze:i m.*~s~..*$t mm 1_’i.!’_!1._ time. The

shaft be disbursed to the-. —-

LA a1’fiij;aa-:f112{.1f1t;hvu’ardoffl1eTribu:1a1is1xxad1fied’ .

fippml in nllmlui input a::ooru.1ng1y” ‘ .

Sd,/…

Judge